Healings Today

You said, "For 1900 years the modern tongues movement was unheard of." DHK, better take another look!

If you choose to read the research, you will see that it shows that 'speaking in tongues' existed from the Day of Pentecost until now, as well as the 'gifts of the Spirit.' Guess what?...and they will until He returns.

MEE </font>[/QUOTE]The Didache says, "For the Father desireth that the gifts be given to all" and also describes prophets who speak "in the Spirit." [177]
This says nothing about tongues.

Justin Martyr wrote, "For the prophetical gifts remain with us, even to the present time… Now it is possible to see amongst us women and men who possess gifts of the Spirit of God." [178]
This says nothing specific to tongues.

This can be interpreted in more than one way. Irenaeus wrote about the church in the first century, that they "had received" numbers of gifts from God. He is not necessarily speaking of his time, nor of all time to come. He also lived immediately after the time of the Apostles when these gifts had just ceased. And thirdly, Irenaeus himself had some very odd beliefs which would make his own belief system very suspect. He believed that Jesus lived a long life, and died at the age of 80, for example.

Celsus, a pagan, wrote near the end of the second century that Christians in his day spoke in tongues.
Good point. If he were a pagan he wouldn't know what a true Christian was, and wouldn't know the difference between the real gift (which had passed), and Satan's counterfeit.

The theologian Origen (died 254?) preserved his testimony without denying the existence and validity of tongues, and accepted the gifts of the Spirit for his day. [181]
Origen accepted a lot of things. I doubt that he was a Christian. He is known as the Father of Arianism—an outright heretic. Even the Catholic Church considers Origen as an heretic. His testimony concerning tongues therefore is very suspect. I say this, not because "tongues" didn't exist—it did—in some form. But it wasn't the Biblical gift that was around in Origen's time, and if he wasn't saved how would he discern it. Ecstatic tongues is not the gift of tongues.

A group called the Montanists emphasized the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues.
History has shown that this is simply a false statement—a lie. The Montanists, as a whole did not believe in tongues, though they did have a heavy emphasis on the teaching of the Holy Spirit.

Tertullian believed in many strange things. During one part of his life he believed in baptismal regeneration; another time he didn't. Here he doesn't believe in Biblical tongues. This is quite evident. Biblical tongues was not ecstatic; they were real foreign languages which Paul said had to be spoken in order, for "God is not the author of confusion." What does Tertullian say?
"let him produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer - only let it be by the Spirit, in an ecstasy, that is, in a rapture,… Now all these signs (of spiritual gifts) are forthcoming from my side without any difficulty."
This is not Biblical tongues! He says specificall "IN AN ECSTASY." That is not what Biblical tongues were. They were controlled by the Spirit. Being in an ecstasy was a sign of being controlled by Satan. That is what Paul warned against in 1Cor.12:1-4. Furthermore, spiritual gifts do not come forth from one's side!

This is getting tedious. I hope you see my point. I can continue through every post written in this article and show how there is no evidence for Biblical tongues in the last 1900 years.
DHK

 

Hi Rose, I am so sorry to hear of your "thorn". It is very encouraging to hear how, like Paul, you have found strength in your weakness. I am also sorry to hear that Christians made you feel like your illness was your fault and that you didn't have enough faith to be healed. What a horrible thing that some Christians do that to those who are their brothers and sisters.

I am praying for you Rose!!!

DHK, again you have done a great job defending the Bible's position, Thank you.

Carol, you know I think well of you and that won't change. I will see you in Heaven some day, I just thought I should point that out. (he he)

Anyway, lately in the thread you haven't dealt with me and DHK's scriptures or concepts. Please try to refute what we are saying by addressing what we say directly and not adding new arguments. Thanks.

God's blessings to all,
Brian

 

Hey....so good to see the debate going back into the same old unproductive ways agian. NOT!

Here was the original question posted by New In Christ~

New In Christ,
On the first paragraph of your question....I guess it just depends on where people attend church in the U.S. (I personnally think healing happens in some churches here in the U.S.)

On the related thought as to why some belive that it has passed? Maybe DHK or Briguy can answer.... But, I'm assuming and think it has to do with something about the temple burning in 70 A.D. and 1Cor.13:8-10? Is this right you guys is this reason why some belive healing has passed?


Music4Him

 

New In Christ,
On the first paragraph of your question....I guess it just depends on where people attend church in the U.S. (I personnally think healing happens in some churches here in the U.S.)

On the related thought as to why some belive that it has passed? Maybe DHK or Briguy can answer.... But, I'm assuming and think it has to do with something about the temple burning in 70 A.D. and 1Cor.13:8-10? Is this right you guys is this reason why some belive healing has passed?


Music4Him </font>[/QUOTE]I thought I had answered this question for you. I know that I have answered the second part of your question many times on this board, if not on this very thread. Healing is one of the sign gifts, that along with tongues ceased in the first century, when they were no longer needed to authenticate the message of the Apostles. See my post at the top of this page. Tongues in particular ceased because it was a sign to the unbelieving Jew, and judgement came on them as a result. That is where the destruction of the Temple came in. The other gifts passed away near the end of the first century when the Apostles passed away. They were gifts that were used to authenticate the message of the Apostles, as Paul had said that the signs of an Apostle were demonstrated with signs and wonders.

As to the first part of your question pleas realize that though the gift of healing has ceased, healing per se has not ceased. God still heals albeit in answer to prayer. Why does there seem to be more healings in third world nations than in our nation. Good question. Perhaps it is because there is far more sickness and far less medicine, thus far more need.
There is also a lot less skepticism concerning healing. Jesus said: "An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign." Many here want to be healed instead of going to a doctor (which could do the same thing) because they want to see a sign. What does Jesus say about that? In fact there are cults that have allowed their members to die because they have refused to allow their members to receive medical attention. God does not answer the prayer of the foolish. He gave us minds to use.

Healings and miracles do take place--many of them in third world countries where there is much poverty and no available resources to medical facilities--where there is an actual faith to be healed, not just skepticism and the desire to see a healing for the sake of seeing a healing.

Don't get me wrong. I can't judge people's hearts. And I am not saying this about all western people. There are genuine needs in America, and other western nations. There are also genuine healings. We are addressing your question as to porportion, and that is all.
DHK

 

It is a shame that you can't see Scripture as it is. I am not the one that is twisting Scripture MEE. Let me plainly demonstrate your twisting of Scripture.

1. You have redefined "filling of the Holy Spirit."
2. You have redefined "baptism of the Holy Spirit."
3. You have redefined what it means to be saved.
4. You are unable to demonstrate the plan of salvation outside of the Book of Acts.

Now who is twisting Scripture?
DHK

 

It is a shame that you can't see Scripture as it is. I am not the one that is twisting Scripture MEE. Let me plainly demonstrate your twisting of Scripture.

1. You have redefined "filling of the Holy Spirit."
2. You have redefined "baptism of the Holy Spirit."
3. You have redefined what it means to be saved.
4. You are unable to demonstrate the plan of salvation outside of the Book of Acts.

Now who is twisting Scripture?
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]Huh? What you talking about DHK when you say redefined?
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

BTW, sorry about the last post on getting off track I must of read the wrong page and got off track. However I will appologize for that. We all have those days I assume...(I just thought it would never happen to me....LOL)

Music4Him

 

It is a shame that you can't see Scripture as it is. I am not the one that is twisting Scripture MEE. Let me plainly demonstrate your twisting of Scripture.

1. You have redefined "filling of the Holy Spirit."
2. You have redefined "baptism of the Holy Spirit."
3. You have redefined what it means to be saved.
4. You are unable to demonstrate the plan of salvation outside of the Book of Acts.

Now who is twisting Scripture?
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]1. No, I haven't!
2. No, I haven't!
3. No, I haven't!
4. No, I haven't!

How could anyone show another plan of salvation other than what is in the book of Acts? DHK, there aren't two different ways to be saved.

The books written after the book of Acts were letters to the church's that were converted during the time when the NT church was in its infancy.

You won't find two different plans of salvation!

Scripture plainly says, "Repent, (I think you believe this) be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, (you don't agree with this) and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (you choose another version of this)

So now who is twisting the Scripture?

Believe what you want, but I haven't redefined anything. I just don't agree with your point of view.

MEE

 

DHK, since I may be leaving BB, would you mind posting your picture..or send it to me by e-mail? You don't know how many times I've wondered what you look like. Other moderators do this, so it isn't an odd request.

If this request isn't within your means...I'll live!

Now, back to the topic!

MEE

 

Hey MEE, why would you be leaving??? If it's because you can't convince someone to believe the Gospel the way it should be understood, join the club.

Some people are just set in their ways and will go to eternity believing whatever they want to believe.

But hopefully you will stay and fight the good fight of faith!!

Working for Jesus,

Tam,

 

DKH
You make a big deal about healing as op0osed to a gift of healing. If I am sick I just want to get healed you can call it gift of healing or just plain healng I don't care. I would just want to get well.

 

Mee I hope you can hang in there until your 1000th post, you are getting close.

 

Sorry to hear that you're sick atestring. Though I don't believe that "the gift of healing" is operative for today, I certainly believe in a God who heals and does heal in these days. He heals through prayer, in answer to our prayers, and according to his will. We will pray that the Lord will heal you, and that you will recover from whatever sickness you might have. May God have his way in your life.
DHK

 

DHK, atestring, I think, was just saying "if" he was sick, not that he is sick.

atestring, by what you have said you still do not grasp that spritual gift usage is up to the one who has the gift, not up to God. He has given the gift away. How many times have you given a gift to someone and then told them they can only use the gift when you say? I hope never as it would be a pretty poor gift if someone had it and couldn't decide when to use it. Once you understand that you will understand why DHK and I say so directly that the Gift of Healing, has passed.

Carol, you quoted Acts 2:38 again, which has been clearly shown to have nothing for you and I. It was directed at the people of Isreal only, those responsible for the death of God's Son. I know you think that "those far off" is Gentiles but that is a huge stretch, even beyond a stretch, for the simple reason that it is about 9 or 10 chapters later that Peter gets the word from God that the Gentiles are "clean" and can receive the gospel. He would not have said anything of Gentiles at the point of 2:38. Anyway, my point is that you are holding on to some concepts that don't pass the "Bible Test", so to speak.

Tam, atestring, M4H, When you read the scriptures that DHK used, do you still feel that DHK and I are not saved??? Looking forward to your response,

In Love and Truth,
Brian

 

No Brian, no one has shown me that Acts 2:38 has nothing to do with the Gentiles. Some may have 'attempted' to express their 'opinion,' but, no, it has not been shown.

Brian, in Matthew 28:19-20 Jesus says,

19) Go ye therefore, and teach ALL NATIONS, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;
20) Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.

If Matt. 28:19 is to be taught to ALL NATIONS then I would say that the command, from Jesus, was started in Acts 2:38 and is to continue until ..."the end of the world."

As far as Acts 2:38 not being for the Gentiles, then why did Cornelius receive the same plan of salvation that was first given to the Jews?

Acts 10:44-48 ... Peter preached the same word, and the Gentiles received the Holy Ghost, "..for they heard them speak with tongues,...then Peter said, "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? ...then Peter .. "commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord

BTW, the name to be baptized in is Jesus Christ. Using titles, in baptism, is another doctrine of the Catholic Church....but that's another topic.

I realize that this is a BB and I'm just a visitor, but I am in the debate forum.

Sorry to burst your bubble Brian, but I'll stick with the Bible and that will pass any test!

Hey, sorry! This topic is about 'healing.' Just to keep on topic, I believe that the nine gifts, (gifts of healing) are still for us today.

MEE

 

Brian,
I didn't say you weren't saved, where did that come from?

Tam

 

OK Briguy,
I have never stated that you nor DHK was not saved. But on the other hand I have told such in other words without the party who said it comming right out and saying it. That attack on me was because I choose to belive that healing is for today.
Like I have said in other post in other threads. I belive the way the Baptist lay out the plan of salvation it is bibically the right way to salvation.
Romans 3:23 Everyone has sinned.
Romans 6:23 The penalty for our sin is death.
Romans 5:8 Jesus Christ died for our sin.
Romans 10:8-13 To be forgiven for our sin, we must belive and confess that Jesus is Lord. Salvation comes though Jesus.


(BTW,As you can see I used scripture out of Romans as the way of salvation does that make you think that I only use the book of Romans as a way of salvation?) The eunuch that Philip encountered in the desert only read Isaiah and was saved when Philip guided him preaching Jesus to him with the book of Isaiah. (Acts 8:26-40)

Now I have heard there are some religions that would have their people think that its water only that saves(babtisim)...water don't save but can wash the outside off a little in spots. Some think you just got to work your way in. John 10:1 says that he that enters not by the door (the door being Jesus) into the sheepfold but climbs up some other way the same is a thief and a robber. Jesus is the only way to salvation.

Now heres my question to you and DHK...do you belive that me, Tam, atestring, Mee, and any others that belive in Jesus unto salvation, but also choose to recive the promises in the bible and what the bible says pertaining to the 9 gifts of the Spirit..... do you belive that we who belive in the "extra perks" that comes with salvation are saved?

Sincerely,
Music4Him

 

CORRECTIONin bold)
OK Briguy,
I have never stated that you nor DHK was not saved. But on the other hand I have been[/B} told such in other words without the party who said it comming right out and saying it. That attack on me was because I choose to belive that healing is for today.

 

Music4Him, I appreciate your explanation of salvation. I thought that you believed the same, and I believe that Tam does as well.
MEE does not, neither does Oneness when she comes on. Oneness is a Oneness Pentecostal, and MEE has similar if not the same beliefs. She can correct me if I am wrong.
MEE believes that baptism is a requirement for salvation, that you cannot be saved without it. This is works salvation, or baptismal regeneration. It is one of the oldest heresies of Christianity. It implies that the work of Christ on the cross was not sufficient enough to atone for our sins, therefore man has to do something to help Christ along. He has to help him by being baptized. That is his role in salvation. Christ can't pay for salvation by himself. Man has to have his part. This is blasphemy.
The Oneness doctrine also requires that you speak in tongues in order to be saved. Again: works salvation. One has to work their way to heaven by baptism and by speaking in tongues. Salvation is not by the grace of God any more; it is by man's work of baptism and speaking in tongues. This is heresy. It is not the gospel of Christ. It is another gospel, which Paul said that if any should come to you and bring such a gospel: "Let him be accursed!"
I was not baptized for two years after I was saved. Thus, by their theology I would have gone to hell after I was saved. You see the problem here. Neither one of them can present the gospel as you have done, outside of the Book of Acts.

What you believe in is what we refer to as a "Second Blessing." I believe that by your testimony you are saved, but just deceived in some of your theology (that is concerning the spiritual gifts).
It has been demonstrated, for example, that tongues is not for today. It is easily demonstrated on three points:
1. It is a sign to the unbelieving Jew (1Cor.14:21,22). Its purpose has thus been fulfilled.
2. It was a gift that was spoken in real foreign languages (not gibberish as it is today), and translated into an actual language with meaning as well. This is not done today.
3. Women were absolutely forbidden to speak in tongues. If this were true of today, tongues would cease in a minute.

Concerning healing, the Apostles had the power at times in their ministries, to heal all that came to them. No one today has that power. The gift of healing has thus ceased. That one is easy.

Saved--yes; confused--yes.
DHK